On 29/10/2011 21:10, John C Klensin wrote:
would be perfectly adequate to permit support for, e.g., 6yz or
x7z codes.
Whether it is a good idea or not is another question, but it
seems to me that the protocol design is adequate.
Of course, this assumes you don't want the 'new' response before the
negotiation.
In the case of a 'wait' extension, it would be 'nicer' to have
<connection>
421 Server in maintenance, try later wait:600
rather than
<connection>
220 hi
EHLO me
220-AUTH LOGIN
220 SMTPRETRY
AUTH <stuff>
220 OK (which may need to be faked if the real auth database is not
available)
EHLO me again
220 SMTPRETRY
NEEDRETRYDATA
621 Server in maintenance, try later wait:600